ARM: Intel Has An Uphill Climb Ahead

Status
Not open for further replies.

milktea

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2009
599
0
18,980
0
"watch the heavyweights duke it out in style"
I like that! The battle between ARM and x86 in both the mobile and non-mobile sector. Very good news for consumer. :D
 

reggieray

Distinguished
Nov 4, 2010
454
0
18,780
0
Intel and MS aka Wintel were caught up in the bloatware easily for over a decade maybe two. Microsoft would release bigger fatter OS's that were resource hogs and Intel would go along with nwere faster chips. It worked great for years but it looks like they both got caught with their pants down.
 

reggieray

Distinguished
Nov 4, 2010
454
0
18,780
0
Some better chip designs and OS's were lost because of the MS/intel monopoly. RISC chips and OS's, then there is OS2 Warp for starters.
 

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator
[citation][nom]milktea[/nom]Let's have a count.Who thinks x86 is most likely going downhill in the future??[/citation]

I don't. Sorry but switching to ARM for everything would be near impossible. Its the same reason Intel's Itanium IA64 arch didn't take over and instead we have x86-64. The change is too hard for the majority of consumers.

As for the x86 mobile sector, I don't see it as anything more than a win for consumers. Having more choices never hurts and Intel has shown that Atom is decent for the small app based markets.

I only hope they spur ARM to make major innovations. I actually want to see a 22nm 3D Tri Gate based CPU in a smartphone that has stacked RAM. That would be awesome.

[citation][nom]ReggieRay[/nom]Intel and MS aka Wintel were caught up in the bloatware easily for over a decade maybe two. Microsoft would release bigger fatter OS's that were resource hogs and Intel would go along with nwere faster chips. It worked great for years but it looks like they both got caught with their pants down.[/citation]

Not sure how this applies or what truth there is. Intel has never added any bloatware and like AMD continues to try and make CPUs faster. Windows is hardly bloated as even 7 only uses less than 1GB of RAM. Of course Windows is still well behind CPU power.

A current system with a Sandy Bridge CPU or Phenom II is more than powerful enough for Windows 7 and will probably be more powerful than whats needed for Windows 8.

If you want to complain about bloatware, talk to the OEMs such as Dell, HP and such who continually take pay-offs to include crap software that's not needed by the majority of the people or is just plain crap (I'm looking at you Norton, McAffe etc).
 

deltatux

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2008
335
0
18,780
0
Since the mobile market has no reliance on Microsoft ... I say x86 is pretty much stuck to the conventional PC market and Intel's just wasting money like they did with Itanium.

Though, I do question how ARM on the desktop will play out due to the over-reliance on Microsoft.
 
[citation][nom]ReggieRay[/nom]Some better chip designs and OS's were lost because of the MS/intel monopoly. RISC chips and OS's, then there is OS2 Warp for starters.[/citation]

thats funny because MS help make OS2 Warp. at least on the business versions of it
 

dread_cthulhu

Distinguished
Dec 7, 2010
185
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]jimmysmitty[/nom]I don't. Sorry but switching to ARM for everything would be near impossible. Its the same reason Intel's Itanium IA64 arch didn't take over and instead we have x86-64. The change is too hard for the majority of consumers.As for the x86 mobile sector, I don't see it as anything more than a win for consumers. Having more choices never hurts and Intel has shown that Atom is decent for the small app based markets.I only hope they spur ARM to make major innovations. I actually want to see a 22nm 3D Tri Gate based CPU in a smartphone that has stacked RAM. That would be awesome.Not sure how this applies or what truth there is. Intel has never added any bloatware and like AMD continues to try and make CPUs faster. Windows is hardly bloated as even 7 only uses less than 1GB of RAM. Of course Windows is still well behind CPU power.A current system with a Sandy Bridge CPU or Phenom II is more than powerful enough for Windows 7 and will probably be more powerful than whats needed for Windows 8.If you want to complain about bloatware, talk to the OEMs such as Dell, HP and such who continually take pay-offs to include crap software that's not needed by the majority of the people or is just plain crap (I'm looking at you Norton, McAffe etc).[/citation]

Agreed!
 

rantoc

Distinguished
Dec 17, 2009
1,859
1
19,780
0
If Intel manage to get their power envelope down to arm levels they will likely take over the phone industry as well since even the basic x86 Atom out-paces the current Arm offerings per clock especially in flops. Amd awoke the giant in the past performance market with the excellent Athlon family and guess what happened... Core2 and now Sandy Bridge.

Now its Arm who awoke them in another market, lets see how that ends up! With the new techs/shrink their rolling out i would not count out Intel even for a sec and contrary to some here, i do like competition - It brings out better products at better prices for the consumers!
 
G

Guest

Guest
rantoc: Nobody cares about performance per clock with these chips. The lowest power Atom chip only runs at 300mhz, and it's still 300% more power hungry than the average ARM chip. If a 300mhz Atom core is about on par with a 600mhz ARM CPU that consumes less than a watt, then it's not even a close race.
 

rantoc

Distinguished
Dec 17, 2009
1,859
1
19,780
0
[citation][nom]use_your_h3ad[/nom]rantoc: Nobody cares about performance per clock with these chips.[/citation]

Read the first 9 words again, maybe the cache memory ran out?
 

billj214

Distinguished
Jan 27, 2009
253
0
18,810
12
The ARM industry is afraid of Intel with it's superior manufacturing process and mass of patents which have the capability of making a superior processor for just about any application.
I would put my bets on Intel's mobile processor based on the Sandy Bridge architecture to dominate and who knows how tri-gates will help the power consumption but if I had to bet, it will revolutionize the mobile market!
 
They can easily make gains in the tablet sector if they would just get their act together. As for smart phones one better define their terms and goals of what they consider success as Intel can't be in every sector and do well. It is better to be fat and happy by doing well in a few rather than being in every sector and do very poorly. Intel has the x86 market any way and x86 isn't going to go away any time so why should it be so concerned whe arm cpu in general could barely compete with a p4 in terms of raw performance.
 
G

Guest

Guest
rantoc: It doesn't matter what the first 9 words is, because of 2 things:

1. Intel cannot magically overcome the laws of physics with a bloated and inefficient architecture, and
2. "as well since even the basic x86 Atom out-paces the current Arm offerings per clock"

You see, the greater IPC is at the expense of inferior performance-per-watt, CISC vs. RISC and all... Unless you just "believe" in Intel... How'd that revolutionary Terascale chip work out for you?
 

sykozis

Distinguished
Dec 17, 2008
1,759
5
19,865
37
[citation][nom]milktea[/nom]Let's have a count.Who thinks x86 is most likely going downhill in the future??[/citation]
It's not "x86 vs ARM"....it's another round of CISC vs RISC....and I'm assuming we all know who won the last battle of such.

[citation][nom]deltatux[/nom]Since the mobile market has no reliance on Microsoft ... I say x86 is pretty much stuck to the conventional PC market and Intel's just wasting money like they did with Itanium.Though, I do question how ARM on the desktop will play out due to the over-reliance on Microsoft.[/citation]
This may be ARM's first venture into the desktop market, but not the first for RISC based processors. I believe Intel's last win over RISC based processors was more due to acceptance and support than RISC based processors actually being inferior to any extent.

[citation][nom]jimmysmitty[/nom]I don't. Sorry but switching to ARM for everything would be near impossible. Its the same reason Intel's Itanium IA64 arch didn't take over and instead we have x86-64. The change is too hard for the majority of consumers.As for the x86 mobile sector, I don't see it as anything more than a win for consumers. Having more choices never hurts and Intel has shown that Atom is decent for the small app based markets.I only hope they spur ARM to make major innovations. I actually want to see a 22nm 3D Tri Gate based CPU in a smartphone that has stacked RAM. That would be awesome.Not sure how this applies or what truth there is. Intel has never added any bloatware and like AMD continues to try and make CPUs faster. Windows is hardly bloated as even 7 only uses less than 1GB of RAM. Of course Windows is still well behind CPU power.A current system with a Sandy Bridge CPU or Phenom II is more than powerful enough for Windows 7 and will probably be more powerful than whats needed for Windows 8.If you want to complain about bloatware, talk to the OEMs such as Dell, HP and such who continually take pay-offs to include crap software that's not needed by the majority of the people or is just plain crap (I'm looking at you Norton, McAffe etc).[/citation]
Switching users from Intel's CISC based x86 architecture set to ARM's RISC architecture will be slow...and painful for consumers. Unless ARM can manage to get support from software companies, they stand no chance. IF they manage to get software support, consumers will have to buy RISC compatible versions of the software they already own x86 compatible versions of.
 

fir_ser

Distinguished
Apr 7, 2011
739
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]ReggieRay[/nom]Intel and MS aka Wintel were caught up in the bloatware easily for over a decade maybe two. Microsoft would release bigger fatter OS's that were resource hogs and Intel would go along with nwere faster chips. It worked great for years but it looks like they both got caught with their pants down.[/citation]
LOL
 

ProDigit10

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2010
585
1
18,980
0
It'd make more sense if Intel will lend it's licensing plants to ARM.
Intel could offer cheaper designs, and smaller manufacturing processes.

An ARM-Intel joint venture would be very profitable for both companies.
Instead of fighting eachother, fighting alongside of one another will be the right thing to do, and produce intel-arm branded designs!

If both companies could only agree to share each other's strengths, like ARM lends it's ARM technology, and intel it's extruded processor design, together with perhaps something similar to hyperthreading, turbo boost technology, SSE for ARM (if that could exist), and perhaps even out of order if that could exist on ARM.

Also, upcoming intel designs will rather be x64 than x86.
They know how to provide for stuff people don't need, even on their cellphones.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Once they perfect the graphene-tech, power consumption will no longer be an issue.
 

dealcorn

Distinguished
Jun 12, 2008
73
0
18,630
0
"Intel cannot magically overcome the laws of physics."

Agreed, but what does that mean when Intel can produce an ad hoc reinvention of their transistor process resulting in a 50% reduction in voltage at a constant performance level. I call it an engineered solution, but the word magic also works for me.

Ecosystems are fun and vibrant. Just ask any substantive land critter from the pre-Cambrian period. Oops, they are basically all extinct.

So far we have bluster from Intel. I am curious to see what Atom's got at 32nm, 22nm, and 14nm. The mobile market is a fitting challenge for their skill set and consumers will benefit however it turns out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY